![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Learning Objective 1: describe the perceptions and satisfaction of healthcare providers using voice communications technology.
Learning Objective 2: discuss the clinical implications of healthcare providers’ use of voice communications technology.
Our study provides evidence that voice communications technology may: (1) reduce noise levels in the acute care setting and the overall time for completing patient requests; and (2) increase the speed and quality of communication between patients and healthcare providers with the possible end result being increased satisfaction for both healthcare consumer and provider. One negative implication of our findings is the potential impact on privacy of healthcare providers’ communication with patients. Just as a healthcare practitioner is concerned with and takes responsibility for the working order (e.g., accuracy, sensitivity, etc.) of a stethoscope or sphygmomanometer, the practitioner should give similar consideration to ensuring that voice communications technology is in good working order. Thus, the practitioner should be schooled in proper use and maintenance of the components of the voice communications system upon which they depend. It appears that voice communications technology is viable. When in good working order, the system can improve communication on patient care units. The limitations of the device are the lack of reliability in both the logging-on and voice recognition aspects of the system. Voice recognition devices remain unreliable for the most part and voice communications technology is no exception.